MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4413358966 · doi:10.5334/ijic.nacic24085

Hospital at Home in Calgary, Canada: An opportunity for real-world care planning and integration.

2025· article· en· W4413358966 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Michelle Grinman, Juhina El-Hajj, Ryan Kozicky, Thomas Mullie, Jillian Walsh

Notice bibliographique

RevueInternational Journal of Integrated Care · 2025
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineHealth Professions
ThématiqueGeriatric Care and Nursing Homes
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésIntegrated careNursingMedicineHealth careEconomic growth

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Introduction: The Complex Care Hub (CCH) is a hospital at home model for older adults and patients with complex medical conditions. As a collaboration between hospital physicians, nurses, pharmacists, community paramedics and home care, CCH provides substitutive acute care in patients' homes, leveraging a hybrid of in-person and virtual modalities. MethodsCCH was co-designed with an inter-professional, inter-organizational team spanning the healthcare system in Calgary, Canada. This included two Calgary acute care hospitals (including their General Internal Medicine and Family Medicine Hospitalist physician groups, Emergency Department, Radiology, Laboratory, Pharmacy and Day Medicine Clinics), Community Paramedics, Transition Services, Home Care and Primary Care in Calgary, Canada. Throughout this process we also involved patient advisors to support development of materials and processes impacting patient care and transitions across the system.The program evaluation leveraged the Quapruple Aim framework via a multi-methods study that included patient, caregiver and provider surveys and interviews, as well as quantitative data analysis on patient outcomes, healthcare utilization and cost. This included a comparison of CCH patients with retrospective propensity-matched controls, on the basis of demographic and clinical factors. For data from 208-2020, 24 of 278 CCH patients were matched to contemporaneous controls, and 238 were matched to historical controls at the same site. Currently, the same analysis is being conducted for admissions between 2020-2023. Results: CCH patients and caregivers responding to the survey reported an overall high quality of care. In the 2 years prior to the pandemic, patients' average rating of CCH care was 9.3 out of 0 (n=69). Of CCH patients surveyed during the COVID-9 pandemic (n=9), 97% of patients (n=9) were "satisfied" or "very satisfied," 00% reported that they were treated with "respect and dignity," and 80% felt prepared to manage their conditions upon discharge. Health-related quality of life measured by the EQ-5D visual analogue scale found an average improvement of 9.8 points from admission (n=48) to 30 days post discharge. Furthermore, there were no unexpected deaths of CCH patients during the first 5 years of the program.Length of stay (in days) appeared to be twice as long for CCH patients versus controls. However, when separating by subgroups, the AA group showed no statistically significant difference in length of stay, while the EFD subgroup had a statistically significant increase in length of stay over twice that of controls. AA subgroup cost estimates suggest 35% lower cost of index admissions with a further avoidance of 3% in the 80 days post-dishcarge with an overall reduction in cost of 22%. EFD subgroup showed 78% higher cost during the index admissions (approximately $9700 versus $000 for controls) with but showed a dramatic cost avoidance of 65% in the 80 days post-discharge ($5800 versus $24000) with an overall equal cost over 6 months in both arms. When all patients were analyzed together, the same pattern was observed as for the EFD subgroup, which comprised 75% of admissions. At the time of writing this abstract the analysis for data from 2020 to 2023 is in progress.ConclusionsHospital at Home is an emerging model of care that is able to safely provide home-based acute care and enhance transitions of care via real-world care-planning. The ability to care for patients outside of hospital walls increases capacity while reducing the need to build new physical infrastructure and is able to achieve the quadruple aim. Next Steps: As HAH gains momentum internationally, there is a need to formally recognize this model as a clinical entity that requires a specialized skillset and linkages with the community to improve patient outcomes and reduce potentially avoidable hospitalizations.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,069
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,499

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0050,001
Communication savante0,0030,001
Science ouverte0,0010,004
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0030,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,029
Tête enseignante GPT0,382
Écart entre enseignants0,354 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2025
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueInternational Journal of Integrated Care→Même sujetGeriatric Care and Nursing Homes→Travaux en français237 207→